Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Hmmm, i dunno. You can train a dog to resist eating food in front of his face.Animals, on the other hand, don't HAVE that capability.
These are good points. I have been to a Muslim nation---Morocco---and the lust emanating from most of the men there was almost tangible. I have never been stared at or boldly approached by men, as in the manner I was while there. I was told not even to make eye contact, if possible, with men while in public, lest they take it as a come-on. Even though I and some other females with me followed this rule, and dressed very, very conservatively ( loose shirts, long skirts, etc.. ), we were still harassed. So, yes, in this case, I believe the forced separation of men and women in society, and the women's 'duty' of covering themselves, has actually created more lust, as opposed to lessening it.Runt said:Okay, I guess I can see your point, somewhat. However, I think deliberately depriving people of certain things fuels desire. Think, for example, of the stories so recently in the news about priests molesting children. I doubt that this is a case where lots of dirty old men are attracted to a religion where they will have to take vows of chastity. Instead, I suspect that perfectly normal males succumb to lust because the very ABSENSE of sexuality in their lives actually reminds them of what they have deprived themselves of, and in this way feeds sexual desire.
But I will agree, now, that sexuality that is flaunted is going to incite more lust than sexuality that is hidden... but I think BOTH can cause lust.